It seems to me that there's a certain level that's humane and just and affordable ... and insufficient for the significant majority of people who want more than that. But really, I think we're at the point where there's not enough work to be done by all the people we have, so better it should be done by people who want to do it -- and thus get more than whatever the minimum is. But the minimum should be way higher than it is today.
[...]
...............
This brings back a memory - probably error ridden.
Didn't Buckminister Fuller insist (using more or less the same arguments you're making in this thread) that people should receive a basic living wage - just for being members of a technologically well equipped civilization? As I recall, he believed there'd be more than enough of us innately pushed by our simian busy-ness demiurge to get the world's work done.
So there'd be little danger of, say, inadvertently creating a planet of people waiting for something good to come on the Atomo-tele-screen but too lazy to get off the ultra alpha wave relaxant couch to produce any of it.
After years of laboring in the dilithium mines of IT, I can honestly say I'd love for a Noah's ark load of folk - at least - to stay the hell home to focus on their gardens, tend to their kids, volunteer and generally enjoy a quiet life. Everyday I'm dealing with people who really just don't want to be around and who engineer obstacles and create tension because of their deep-seated unhappiness.
.d.